- 7 -
court proceeding by failing to sign and return the proposed
settlement document mailed to him on March 16, 1998. If
petitioner unreasonably protracted the court proceeding, then
petitioner may not be entitled to any recovery for litigation
costs incurred after receipt of the proposed settlement document.
With respect to costs incurred after March 16, 1998, petitioner
claims recovery only for mileage (245 miles) and a postage
expense of $8.54.
We have previously held that a taxpayer's refusal to sign a
stipulated decision does not constitute unreasonable protraction
of the proceeding when the taxpayer's refusal is based upon the
parties' failure to reach an agreement regarding litigation
costs. Buck v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-16. In Buck, the
Commissioner sent the taxpayer a proposed stipulated decision
about 3 weeks before the scheduled trial date. The taxpayer's
attorney met with the Commissioner's attorney, but no agreement
was reached regarding the taxpayer's litigation costs. Under
those circumstances, we held that the taxpayer did not
unreasonably protract the proceeding by refusing to sign the
stipulated decision and appearing at the calendar call to request
an award of litigation costs.
Similarly, in the instant case, petitioner's failure to sign
the proposed settlement document was based on the fact that no
agreement regarding litigation costs could be reached between the
parties. At the earliest, respondent mailed petitioner a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011